Misplaced Pages

I hope you can forgive me as well. I do apologise if I had offended you. Martial Law 16:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

That's it. Enough. Stop posting on my page, Martial law. Go Away. Please. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a brief thank you for your note. All the best, Dan—DCGeist 19:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bahrain IT Team

why this page was deleted and protected ? this team have a very good output and high respect in bahrain . http://www.bahrainitteam.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom 99 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Black pepper and course of world history

Yes,black pepper can claim most of it. It was black pepper that was known as black gold, not nutmeg or any other spice. It was probably the first commodity ever to be called that, long before coffee and even longer before oil.

It was not to the lands further east that the Europeans were seeking a route, but to India. And in this case India was Kerala from where virtually almost all the spices came, although they didn't know what Kerala or Malabar Coast was. The main ports from where spices to Europe (i.e. before the Europeans discovered their sea route) were loaded were in Kerala.

It is unfortunate that you are trivializing Kerala's role in the whole matter by editiing adding the 'lands further east' phrase.

By the way, the word Kerala existed long before that became an official name of it as a new state in the Independent India. Therefore Kerala and Malabar coast are practically interchangeable (although Malabar coast is usually a foreigners' term.) However, Malabar, (without the 'coast') is the norther region of Kerala.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Esesk (talk • contribs) 21:31, August 16, 2006 (UTC)

Well, cloves and nutmeg,during most periods, were worth far more than pepper pound-for-pound. (Yes, the pepper trade has generally been worth more overall, since it was more plentiful and popular). You are right that De Gama and followers didn't know cloves and nutmeg *didn't* come from Kerala and that *all* the spices from the east flowed through the Malabar ports before moving onto Europe. So, Kerala was hugely important for the spice trade, but the emphasis on that importance should be more in Kerala and in Spice trade, not so much in Black pepper. If I have a Malabar / Malabar coast nuance wrong, feel free and change that. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

PS sign your talk-page posts by typeing four tildes (~~~~); when you save the page they will automatically get converted into your name and a timestamp. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

User:His_excellency

He's currently editing under User:Amibidhrohi, although you blocked him for three days. BhaiSaab 23:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I blocked the evading account for three days. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

What happened to the autoblocker? Bishonen | talk 23:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC).

I think the autoblocker only works for 24 hours, or his IP address may have changed. BhaiSaab 23:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds right. I think it does give up after 24 hours if the blocked user doesn't attempt to edit, or something like that. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Not again...

I'm pretty sure we've got another sock of you-know-who: Whiskey Rebellion (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I've suspected a sock since they first showed up, but I've been trying to hold off judgement. But this edit pretty much convinced me--typical wolfstar comment. Keep an eye (or hopefully two) on this one. Ungovernable Force 10:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I have an eye on it. Don't encourage AaronS to bait her like that. I agree that it is likely her. Not yet an "obvious" puppet, to me (I'm very conservative about that). With nothing rising to the level of abuse yet, and with her sockpuppet evasion techniques forcing he to do unwolfish things like make reasonable edits here and there in other areas, I'm not going to do anything about it at the moment -- though if anybody wants to file an RFCU on the account, feel free and cite as evidence my opinion that, having looked through every one of the accounts contribs, it is a likely sock. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it was me who did that. Although it wasn't at all nice, I wouldn't have done if if I wasn't sure this was a sock. I've been watching the user tentatively for the last few days and trying to give the benefit of the doubt, but that one edit made me sure. Maybe it wasn't the best way to deal with it, but it made me feel better. Ungovernable Force 20:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, er, I guess you thought I was talking about ? I would have been if I had seen it; I hadn't, and was only talking about the *coughsockpuppet*-type stuff. Please for the moment do try to keep a lid on the ad hominem arguments. Anyway, please understand that I have no particular understanding of the content issues in the Anarchism articles, so (a) it's almost never a slam-dunk to me determining whether a given edit there is a good or bad thing in general and (b) I have no way of judging how unusual or common Thewolfstar's feelings about the relationships between capitalism, communism, and anarchy might be: in other words, how likely it is that somebody new might come along with the same feelings. And you guys bringing up Jefferson and Orwell before she can just serves to give he an extra reminder, if she needs one, to avoid the other old topics. I still think an RFCU would be good, but maybe Bishonen, if she's reading this hint hint HINT, could take a look and see what she thinks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Trust me, the chances of this not being Wolfstar are maybe 10%. If it's not, then it's RJII or Hogeye, who are both blocked and/or banned. There's maybe a 1% chance that it's not one of them, and that's a liberal estimate. I can understand an outside observer not really knowing it, but considering that every neutral scholarly source I've seen has never once questioned anarcho-communism's place within anarchism, and now all of a sudden we have another "new" user (who happens to have a fairly complex userpage after only a few days, just like the other wolfstar socks) is saying something that is almost identical to thewolfstar's comments makes me pretty much certain. Ungovernable Force 20:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing with you. But I will note that the likelihood of a new editor on any topic having a grounding in the neutral scholarly sources in that topic is pretty low around here, so that's not quite the right metric. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Then again, it won't be long now. . She's coming across a lot of abusive admins? O RLY? I haven't seen a single admin even hint at shaking a stick at her yet. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

lol. Oh yeah, it's a sock. Ungovernable Force 21:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Well, yes, I can understand that. At the same time, based on their knowledge of wikipedia (who creates a userpage like that that quickly after ariving?) I doubt this user is new. And so far, every new user who has come and made edits like that has been blocked for being a sock (of either wolfstar, rjii or hogeye). As KingWen kindly pointed out on their talk page, I once had a discussion with AaronS that went like this:

I'm shocked! You mean that was a sock the whole time? No! So hey, that's two blocked in two days, not bad! The Ungovernable Force 05:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Haha, yeah, I think we're starting to get the gist of this. --AaronS 12:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Working on the anarchism page makes you a first class sock-detector. We've had far too much experience with these types of situations. I don't think it's obvious enough to block yet without upsetting a lot of people on ANI, but it is obvious to anyone experienced with this issue that it's a sock. I think I'll look into RFCU right about now. Thanks for the suggestions. I do understand your doubts--if I were in your situation I would probably have them too. Ungovernable Force 21:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't have time to do check user right now. I'm doing a lot of other things at once (need to go kill some mold in a bathroom, yuck, among other things) and can't sit down long enough to concentrate on filling out a good request. Maybe later tonight. I'm also going to go give a link to this discussion to Bishonen. Ungovernable Force 22:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

copyvio, vandalism, ect !!??

I listed Joseph's Tomb as a copyvio, blanked the page, inserted the tag ect... The creator of the article reverted the article to remove the copyvio tag without disscussion, as well as deleting the copyvio message on his talk page: User talk:Kuratowski's Ghost. His explanation was that he copied the article text from an email that was public domain, and that the copyrighted source also copied that or copied the wikipedia article (unlikely). I have no idea if the public domain e-mail thing works, but I still think it was copied from the source because it lists two sources that this article never did. This is obviously being discussed as Talk:Joseph's Tomb. The page should be treated as a copyvio until we know things for sure right? Thanks --Musaabdulrashid 02:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Answered on talk page. I think you are in the right. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I saw it, extreme thank you again --Musaabdulrashid 02:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

the image

Bunchofgrapes, I'm so sorry. I did not know that this was a copyright photo. Whiskey Rebellion 05:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I just read the conversation above concerning me or other users. I made that comment about "coming across a lot of admin abuse" because of conversations that I have read and situations that I have followed. No admin has been mean to me at all yet. The Ungovernable Force was very mean to me right away, however. This is true. You can read the discussion which has been archived already. As far as making an elaborate page, I borrowed the ideas from User:Abdullah Geelah. Also, I have been using computers since I was 9 years old and know how to do many different things with them. All these misunderstandings are very upsetting to me. Whiskey Rebellion 05:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Bunchofgrapes. I'm sorry for any aggravation that this weird situation has brought you. Thanks for the great advice and thanks for being so nice to me! I shouldn't have made that comment about admin abuse. You and Samir have shown me already how friendly admins can be. Anyhow, anyone can be mean or nice, am I right? Well, thanks again for your kind comments on my page and I'll try to follow all your advice. It will hard though! lol. Whiskey Rebellion 05:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: unicodifying mdash and ndash

Please don't. The problem with the unicode versions of — and – is that they are indistinguishable in the fixed-width font generally seen within Misplaced Pages's editing environment. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

May I ask what browser you're using? On Safari on my Mac, the editing textbox has a proportional font and the width of the different dashes is readily apparent. Admittedly, Camino (which is Gecko-based), the other browser I generally use, uses a monospaced font, but even there, the characters are drawn slightly differently. Cheers, CmdrObot 14:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC).

Well deserved Award

This is my way of thanking you for your assisstance, patience.

Martial Law 20:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Mill Ends Park

Thanks for the help on that, much appreciated. Errick 20:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Rubberjoshy

Hi there: you just deleted an article by this use called "screens". He has another very short article extant called "Dinar Szredy" which you will quickly appreciate transliterates as "dinner's ready". He claims this to be a name of a character in a Bulgarian soap. Is it a hoax, or am I over-suspicious?--Anthony.bradbury 23:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Following links around, he looks like he might be creating an interlinking network of hoax articles. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

That was my thought. But he's been deleted now anyway.--Anthony.bradbury 23:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, his articles were falling to various speedy deletes left and right; I also blocked him a couple hours to slow him down a little, and there's discussion now on WP:ANI about indef-blocking him as a vandalism-only account. Thanks for letting me know. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Another Ray Lopez Out Break

and Complete with fake myspace profile. Stirling Newberry 04:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked WikipediaSleeperCell2 as an innapropriate username. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Award for Bish

Can you transfer this to her ? Her page is protected.

Martial Law 05:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

BLOCK

Why do you keep blocking me, I didnt vandalize anything.

-Dante- August 20, 2006

Recall petition for Bunchofgrapes

See Also

I (Lar) will add any see also links here (to ANI, or whatever) if they turn up. None so far I think.

Bunchofgrapes recall tally

Bunchofgrapes has asked me (Lar (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)) to clerk more formally. He has decided that if he gets 6 valid requests to be recalled (using his metric of what a valid request is) that he will stand down from adminship (ask to have his sysop bit turned off by a steward) at this time, and submit himself to an RfA immediately to get reconformed

The following section is a tally of those who have asked for recall and who Bunchograpes (not me) acknowledges as qualified to so ask. Only submissions are counted, and then only if Bunchofgrapes does not say "I don't accept this one" or words to that effect. Those voicing support or opposing recall, etc. are not counted here. I base my putting people on this list on the discussion immediately below. I copied the bare user link and put it in an informational template, and the date, from the posting.

Certified Recall requests (count: 1)

1. MSTCrow (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) - 22:05, 20 August 2006

Uncertified Recall requests (these do not count toward the tally)

Clerk notes

As I've been asked to clerk, I'd appreciate others not modifying this sub section. If anyone spots errors please let me know. (If you think this should be a subpage that's transcluded, drop me a shout on my talk page... ++Lar: t/c 17:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The end date/time of this recall petition will be 17:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC), one week from the start of the clerking process, per request of Bunchofgrapes (several earlier date/times could have been chosen as the start of the one week period, such as the date/time of the initial request, or the date/time of bunchofgrapes acceptance of my offer to clerk but he has selected the most lenient date reasonably citable as the start point. This clearly avoids any suggestion of impropriety about the end. ++Lar: t/c 12:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Submissions and discussion

(please add submissions (requests and justifications, as well as discussions) here. I will refactor as necessary... ++Lar: t/c 17:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

BunchofGrapes protects user pages to prevent other users from criticizing administrator actions, stifling dissent: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:MSTCrow/Archive_3#Re:_Bishonen.27s_Talk_Page_Thread_on_Myself. He also removes content from his talk page without archiving it: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Bunchofgrapes&diff=71308647&oldid=71290830. He is not mature or wise enough to be an administrator, as he has repeatedly abused his powers, and does not care for the consequences of his actions or apologize to others. - MSTCrow 22:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Request by MSTCrow

Per administrator is open to recall, please add your name below if you are in agreement:

1. MSTCrow 02:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

(dont' add names below this one, start another subsection similar to this one)

Very well; any particular incident you'd like to focus on here, or is this more of an open-format effort? Either is OK, but I'm probably going to have to establish some sort of time limit if it's the latter. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What is going on here? A drive-by recall? FloNight 03:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I can only speculate so far, but I have carried out at least one action that MSTCrow said was abusive. People of good will are free to disagree. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like the revive the ANI discussion, since archived , about a community ban on our nominator. Bishonen asked my inpur earlier today and I hesitated, but now I am sure. - CrazyRussiantalk/email 16:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't really, Crz; I just gave you a link that I thought might interest you, is all. But I agree with reopening the community ban discussion now I see this trolling. (oh, oh, I came >this< close to saying "egregious" there, I think that may be grounds for a block in itself). Bishonen | talk 18:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC).

On what basis? I'd consider him on a short leash, but has he done anything really intolerable since he was unblocked? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I would change my mind, too. Whether BoG wants to change his opinion or not, this is pulling beyond the leash. If we define "trolling" as "paralyzing a website by getting its participants to focus on their own well functioning processes instead of their objectives," then this is trolling. Essentially, by provoking this unmotivated and warrantless request, he is trolling. He has not specified any action that would prompt recall, and yet we're spending time on it. Not only should there be the equivalent of a "speedy close" (meaning that BoG can step down if he wants to, but no basis for anyone else agreeing has been established, and so there is therefore no community to make the request) in this case, but this should reawaken the dormant discussion of MSTCrow's actions and desire to contribute. Geogre 19:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't speak for anyone else but I haven't devoted THAT much time to this, and am fine with the time I've spent so far... I just cribbed a lot of the structure from the last one, after all. Further, speaking less as a clerk and more as a promoter of the recall process, I'm keen to see how this plays out. If it ends up unsupported and we all (except me perhaps) can manage not to dump a lot of time into it, I color it a win, regardless of whatever else transpires, because we're learning every time we go through this. Certainly I see where Tony was coming from though... ++Lar: t/c 23:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Offer to clerk

I stand ready to clerk if desired. BoG let me know this was in progress via my talk so I assume that's what he wants but I'd like to see a formal acceptance here and I'll start. ++Lar: t/c 07:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Formal acceptance here. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Some questions:

• Do you, Bunchograpes, consider MSTCrow a "user in good standing" per your definition?
• Have you, Bunchofgrapes, chosen which option you intend to pursue if the recall petition is successful? Note that I don't think you necessarily have to choose YET, I am just curious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lar (talk • contribs)

Yes, I'm requesting your clerking, Lar, though I'll admit to some cautious optimism that it won't ential much work. MSTCrow's request is valid by my definition. If the recall petition succeeds I will get my bit turned off and submit an RfA request ASAP. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Lar. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

NP. I'll do my best to keep things organised, time permitting (I'm in an internal IBM class this week on our nifty product (shameless plug) II Classic Federation, so may have some calls on my time), feel free to msg or email me with concerns. ++Lar: t/c 18:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• One more question... what time limit did you want to set on this? I see it as your call. And a procedureal note, someone perhaps(?) probably ought to put this up at WP:AN I think. I can if no one else does. ++Lar: t/c 18:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • One week sounds about right. I'm not sure this belongs at AN; or if it does, it seems to me that it would be the petitioner's burdon to place it there. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    • One week it is then. As for putting it up on AN... I'm a big fan of full disclosure (I get dinged for putting stuff on AN all the time as not being needed or being too trivial etc...) but this is your call. ++Lar: t/c 18:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I request this case be discussed in Law French or not at all

You're giving bureaucracy a bad name here, Bunch and Lar. Just say after me: "Bad faith nomination, ignore". Clinch it by linking to MSTCrow's talkpage and the ANI community ban discussion. Sheesh, don't you have some articles to write, guys? Bishonen | talk 18:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC).

I herbyuntoyou solemly declare and announce I'll vote for you BoG. Just tell me where do I have to put my name? Giano | talk 18:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's bad-faithed: MSTCrow genuinely feels, I'm sure, that I am a, you know, ZOMG ABUSIVE ADMIN!!11!. Do I think he's right, or particulary sane? No. It doesn't matter. He's free to try this. It doesn't take up much of my time :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

You will indeeed be counted amongst the blessed BoG! Giano | talk 18:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Counted among the timewasters, you mean. I have such a good mind to sign the recall petition myself. Admit it, Bunch, you're after the cookies and muffins, aren't you? Bishonen | talk 19:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC).

I'll say it if Bunch will not, "Bad faith nomination, ignore". Seriously folks, do we want to set a precedent of grudge-provoked recalls?FloNight 18:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

BoG has the control of what his criteria of a "user in good standing" is. He chose to call MSTCrow's request as that of one from a user in good standing... You may not agree... I may not agree (but as clerk, I won't comment one way or the other till this is over...) but it's his call. If no one else says they support this recall within the time limit BoG set, (or, more accurately, if 5 others don't), it's over. Please let this process work. And please don't sign the recall petition unless you really think there is good reason to recall him. Even for humor value. Yes Bishie i am talking to you. ++Lar: t/c 19:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

This may be an interesting litmus test of frivolous recall votes. We know what happens if an admin open to recall gets recalled, but is there any clause for what happens to a bad faith admin recall nominator? Syrthiss 19:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No. and if there was ever to be such a clause and subsequent action, one would immediatly have charges of cliqueism, ganging up, bullying by admins sticking together etc. This is clearly a bad faith nom, but BoG has to let it go ahead to avoid such charges - I am very surprised to see admins using roll back already - not a good sign. This looks like the way things are going to be! Giano | talk 19:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you are hitting several nails on the head here. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the way BoG is handling this. If we all just ignore this for a week, it will all go away, no muss no fuss, and no time wasted. Paul August ☎ 20:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Rollback

I just rolled back Tony's removal of this section. it is Bunchofgrapes call on whether he views this as bad faith or not, not Tony's. If BoG wants to treat this as real, his perogative. on the other hand if the many people urging him to treat this as bad faith convince him, great, I'll remove it myself. ++Lar: t/c 19:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest that the most damning way to handle spurious requests is to treat them seriously. The lone endorsement speaks volumes. - Aaron Brenneman 00:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Treating it with contempt would obviously be more appropriate. --Tony Sidaway 11:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. What a joke. --kingboyk 12:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Just in a more general case, what actions are required to treat someing with contempt? As opposed to my prefered course, which is treat it as a normal no-fuss occurance and remove it when it goes stale with one lonely user. This is a form of "deny recognition." - brenneman 14:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Nothing to see here, move along

Everybody, please. Deep breaths. This thing is going to waste exactly as much time as we allow it to. I'd really rather not get into the business of judging good-faith/bad-faith here; after all, it is likely to be someone you are in conflict with who initiates a recall petition, and if you are in conflict with someone, you are unlikely to be able to judge that question accurately. I would much rather sit back and, hopefully, watch the additional petitioners fail to roll in. We should let the petition quietly die its natural death rather than speedying it for reasons of time-wasting or having it make us look bad. Of course, that means we should all try our hardest to not have it waste time, or make us look bad. The best way I can think of doing that is to not give it another thought. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Final result

• It is more than 7 days after the start date of this recall petition, 17:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Less than 6 users in good standing have been certified as calling for recall

Therefore as clerk, I find that this petition is unsuccessful, Bunchofgrapes has not been recalled, and the petition process is concluded. Thank you, everyone, for your participation. ++Lar: t/c 04:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Confirm

For the benefit of the wider world and those such as myself, could you confirm, as seems to be the case, that this has all started because you protected a user talk page? Tyrenius 22:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

You would have to ask User:MSTCrow. That is my best guess. It could also be because I am seen as a sympathizer for the well-known abusive admin Bishonen. ;-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It is quite poignant to imagine the poor man's disappointment at finding me not listed on the recall page, yes. Hey, BoG, I'll help you ignore MSTCrow. Watch the space below.

You see? That was me ignoring the user. Am I better at it than Lar, or what? Bishonen | talk 23:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC).

Ignoring what now? Look what I made! An article for a theatre that was only around for 2 1/2 years. And With ALoan AWOL, somebody needs to copyedit it for me... and fix the glaring errors. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do you have a (new) picture of William D'Avenant with a caption saying that it's about Thomas Killigrew's company? Geogre 11:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm? No, that's Killigrew with a good dog, surely. Compare Image:Thomas Killigrew.jpg, same guy 15 years younger. See the nose? No syphilis. What makes you think it's Davenant? Bunch, it's a real purty article, a gem! Bishonen | talk 13:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

Removing suspected sock tag

User:DTC who some suspect of being a sock of User:RJII has been removing the tag on their userpage that says they are suspected of being a sock. I don't know if they are or not (although they do seem quite similar to RJII). What I want to know is, what is the policy regarding removing such notices? Ungovernable Force 07:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I've replied to Irresistible on my page, Grappa. If you have input, all the better. Bishonen | talk 08:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC).

I agree with what Bish said, Immoveable; those tags are rarely worth fighting over, not until the case is all but proven. I'd neither apply nor fight over even the "suspected" ones unless if I would be very surprised if it wasn't true. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

My art

You do realise that if I had not been stupid to release that into the public domain it would probably be more valuable than an Andy Warhol Giano | talk 22:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It reminds me of some really nice flight simulators. From 1992 or so. I faint with delight! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Size of London

Please name one or two of those fine-looking sources. Did you happen to see the figure 80,000 anywhere? Or 300,000? Any figure? Bishonen | talk 00:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC).

• Sheppard, Francis (1998). London: A History. Oxford University Press. p. 37: "The wall enclosed an area of some 133 hectares (330 acres). This was a far larger area than any other Roman town in Britain..."
• Russo, Daniel G. (1998). Town Origins and Development in Early England, c. 400-950 A.D. Greenwood Press. p 115: "London was enclosed for the first time by a great stone wall build around the three landward-facing sides of the town (c.200). Constructed of large ragstones, flints, and mortar, with interval towers and gate houses, it stood twenty-one feet high and eight feet thick, enclosing an area of about 330 acres."

I hadn't looked for population figures; nor (obviously) are these two sources talking about 1666 London. I'll see what I can find later. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I got nothing. Any population figures are all guesswork anyway (unlike something tangible like the question of area within the Roman Wall), so I'd go with whatever the book in front of you says. If you have two books, and they don't say the same, go with a range. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Right. Thank you. Hmmm... "Google books", whazzat? Lessee, any full-view diary of John Evelyn? Ha ha, yes! Learn something every day. Bishonen | talk 13:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC).

Oh, a person could look at Augustan literature and Restoration literature, as I have a feeling one of them talked about population growth and cited a source for the population growth from 1630-1690. That would be a ballpark, anyway. </whistles "Lillalullaberoo"> Geogre 13:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Augustan literature cites this web page, from the "Millwall History Files", a site, uh, focusing on "The Story of Millwall Football Club concentrating on the period since Early 1980's". The page is question appears well-done -- I'm not sure if it is original content or taken from elsewhere -- but I can't really call it an RS. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Not that seeming RS's are particularly R, huh? That's some scandalously out-of-context Pepys-quoting there, isn't it? Why not credit him with inventing the Parmazan cheese, while he's at it? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Colorful Detail, my good man, and merely hinted at, too. Watch me not even even mention how he found on returning after the Fire that the cheese had taken the form of a big subterranean fondue. They all broke out their baguettes and special Swiss fondue forks. Bishonen | talk 17:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC).

Don't be ridiculous, in October 1667 Pepys had an inspiration and invented the fondue fork. It's how the British nearly defeated the Dutch. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Ok that. I am behind Auckland university's proxy server. Hence it adds that '.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz' thing . Please do not consider it as vandalism. --Ageo020 22:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you put my Rfa vote back as well. Thanks --Ageo020 22:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't believe it was intentional vandalism. I will go to the work of putting it back; you should cease editing from behind a strangely misconfigured proxy. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK

I'm startng to notice that Restoration tennis-court theatre articles, even when on the front page, don't attract much attention. Come on! Nothing's more interesting than a Restoration tennis-court theatre, am I right? Hello? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

If you will insist on writing them when people are away... -- ALoan (Talk) 22:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Step away from the computer, vacationing citizen! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

My edit summary idea

Thanks for your note on my talk about my offhand comment regarding configuring Preferences so as to prompt for edit summaries when not initially entered. You wrote:

The idea has its drawbacks. Take a hypothetical individual that would not have, without this coaxing, entered an edit summary. He'll do one of several things:

1. Prodded by the message, he will enter a good edit summary

2. He will enter "skjfsda" or the equivalent, and be annoyed.

3. He will be so annoyed that he will enter "I hate edit summaries".

4.He will be so incredibly annoyed that he won't contribute at all.

I won't venture to be able to accurately assign probabilities to these outcomes, though I would predict that #1 wouldn't outnumber 2, 3, and 4 combined. 2, 3, and 4 are all bad outcomes, I think. (Especially 3, soon we'd have people slapping warning templates on pages about it, and fighting about whether they can be removed, etc. etc.)

Having thought about this some, I suppose you are right that my suggestion is not an unambiguously good idea. Still, I think it could be done in a way that would eliminate 95% of the bad outcomes above. I would set up the "no edit summary warning to read something like this"

Would you like to enter a short Edit Summary of your contribution to Misplaced Pages? (Link to What is this?)

Yes Enter edit summary here:_________________

No Please post my contribution without a summary

Given these choices, I think the bad outcomes are all unlikely. It will be a lot easier for an "annoyed" user to click "No" than to type in "I hate edit summaries" so option 3 will be unlikely. I also find it unlikely that a serious contributor would forget the contribution rather than have the trouble of merely clicking "No" so option 4 would be unlikely. And vandals would have already had the opportunity to input a garbage edit summary before even hitting this page, so option 2 should also be unlikely (and an edit summary of "xzskdfkjafe" probably presages a contribution of equal value so seeing it might actually be helpful to RC patrollers).

And we would then know that a decision not to leave an edit summary was intentional, thereby avoiding RfA opposed based on "only 80% edit summary usage" for long-term contributors who are just a little over-eager to hit "Save Page."

Anyway, that's my reaction. But I still don't know where or whether to post the idea to see if it gets any wider support. Thanks for paying attention, anyway. I guess I won't sign that recall petition after all. :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea w/ the Yes/No choice. I think, though, that to eliminate the bad outcomes, you would also need a "don't ask me again" checkbox; otherwise, after the fifth or sixth time you get the confirmation question, the frustration would really start to build up. But saving the "don't ask again state" would be problematic, because we couldn't do it for anons... still, that sort of thing might work. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Any idea where one could take this idea to? ANI, village pump, ...? Newyorkbrad 16:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

One of the village pumps would be most appropriate. Be warned thatthis would take developer time, so unless people agree the benefit is quite significant, it probably won't happen. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism to your userpage

You'll want to revert your userpage. I almost posted to ANI that there was a problem with anons blocking admins before I figured it must just be some kind of joke. The edit summary was "take that!" Newyorkbrad 16:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad, meet User:EddieSegoura; EddieSegoua, Newyorkbrad. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, already reverted by someone else. I would have reverted it myself but I was under some kind of illusion that I couldn't edit someone else's userpage. Newyorkbrad 16:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocking User:Nobugs

Well done. He certainly seemed Eddieish to me. He was doing an odd thing I haven't noticed before; creating user pages for impostor/doppleganger accounts that had never been created. User:Dvorfygirl, User:Wily Mo Wheels, see my deletion log for August 24, 2006 for the rest of them. The particular account names he made up are somewhat interesting: Dvortygirl is an admin in Wiktionary who did a lot to fend off the Exic*rnt vandal, Wily Mo Peña is a Red Sox player. I guess if we see someone doing this stuff again, we'll know who it is. FreplySpang 16:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

He's fascinated with sockpuppet, impersonation, and doppelganger tags of all stripes. I've seen him create accounts with names like those before, but I admit I can't recall him creating userpages for non-existent users before. Perhaps his IP had used up its allocation of new-accounts-per-day already, or perhaps he just thought of a different way to be disruptive. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to user page vandalize pages like you did on User:Nc817, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.

Wow! I will!? And you're the Queen of England, Eddie. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because you're abusing the extra features. You can't block someone just because you're suspicious. Even sysop user can get blocked if they misbehave. What are you trying to accomplish by creating those tagged userpages anyway? Nobugs 18:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

You're a banned user, Eddie. If I was strongly suspicious when I blocked Nobugs, your vandalism spree immediately after completly confirmed it. You are wasting your own time and ours by continuing to try to edit. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and Eddie - I got your mail (from an account with the EddieSegoura name -- gee, it is you!). It is well past the point of me convincing others that you are not welcome. You are banned by the community, for long-term vandalism and trolling. Read WP:BAN for what that means. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No I'm not, I will keep editing, whether you like it or not, now just leave me alone. If you continue to fight I will have no choice but to defend myself -- User:Eddie segoura

anarchism article

Bunchofgrapes, thanks for your concerns. As far as my edits on talk:Anarchism go, well hardly anyone ever cites their sources on this (or most) talk pages. If you look over the edits you will see this. Also, there are three or four other editors who agree with me on most of my points.

Here are my edits on the article Anarchism:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=prev&oldid=70457435 - removed a pov statement and my removal remains so apparantly there was concurrence here.
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=71464921&oldid=71458465 - grammer fix
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=71465445&oldid=71464921 - link fix - link pointed to other than what was stated.
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=71474394&oldid=71465445 - referenced addition
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=71641008&oldid=71640983 - ideology change - no ref
• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anarchism&diff=71692203&oldid=71684433 - template concerned same ideology change

I only have one edit that should have had a reference but didn't. I apologize, I should have referenced (my ideology change) edit. However, there are many unsourced statements in this article and the large majority of them have not been made by me. Further, innumerable Misplaced Pages articles are teeming with unsourced statements and they, too, have been made by thousands of editors who are not me. I will be more careful in future to source my contributions so you or Ungovernable Force will not think that I don't belong here at Misplaced Pages. I have no control over the ticklishness of the anarchist editors and don't understand it's relevance. If they are ticklish maybe they should toughen up. So far I have no problem at all with User:DTC or User:That'sHot and we get along fine. Have a wonderful evening. Whiskey Rebellion 03:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Green Lantern Vandalism

Obviously it's on a daily basis. Is there any background on it? Is it one person, or a group? Is some statement trying to be made? Thanks for any help. Rsm99833 03:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea; earlier today (ok, yesterday, UTC-wise) was the first time I've come across it. I think I got alerted to it via WP:AIV. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool. I've seen it over the past couple of weeks. Just in the past few days has it seem to escalate. If you ever get any background, please let me know. Have a good weekend!Rsm99833 04:14, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you see this?

Category:Suspected Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Bunchofgrapes. --Lambiam 07:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. A pain-in-the-ass vandal kept recreating it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

ISP fixed, now...

Now that my ISP is fixed for the time being, I can now give you a proper award. Martial Law 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Award

Really, you deserve the award. See you around Bunch Of Grapes. Martial Law 19:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

My RfA and your comments about my policy opinions

Hi, I feel I did not explain myself well regarding polls are evil. I have replied to your !vote but I dont know if you missed it or not. I wonder if you would mind discussing this further on my RfA talk page so that I can get some more views and discuss our ideas. I have asked other users to chip in to and would be obliged if you could pop in and have your say. Thanks --Errant Tmorton166(Review me) 21:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply

You are still banned, Eddie. The reasons for your ban had nothing to do with sockpuppet tags. You are not welcome to edit. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I still don't agree with that. Only the arbitration committee can impose long-term bans on editors and this never happened. In this case, User:Essjay suggested something be done and you come together with other users to talk about me about the redirect pages to Crossover (rail). Hopefully we can work on this as well. --Eddie 20:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wrong. Go read WP:BAN. "Decision to Ban. Source 1: The Misplaced Pages community, taking decisions according to appropriate community-designed policies with consensus support, or (more rarely) following consensus on the case itself.". If you want to appeal your ban, you may do so by contacting the Arbitatration Committee or Jimbo Wales. Good luck with that. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Willy on Wheels 2

I decided to go along with the consensus on that MFD; I felt it was better to do this. I don't want to get into arguments with anyone here! --TheM62Manchester 23:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope you were at least partly swayed by the reasoning behind the discussion. If you still feel you are right, you shouldn't change your stance, but try one more time to explain your reasoning. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I was partly swayed by the reasoning, yes; and I don't want to upset other Wikipedians, either. Anyway, you are a good admin; you've dealt better than me with the EddieSegoura situation! --TheM62Manchester 23:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, M62, I really appreciate that! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Glad you like it. See the WP:ANI thread on EddieSegoura; I have a solution regarding Exicornt trolling. --TheM62Manchester 23:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Somehow I doubt moving it to BJAODN would really solve it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

A misguided attempt by me to solve it, but I did try! Anyhow... keep up the good work! --TheM62Manchester 00:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Then again... Maybe you're a genius, M62. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I decided it should be deleted from here, I can't see a reason to keep it. --TheM62Manchester 22:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Decided what should be deleted? Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse/Willy on Wheels, or the content added in that edit in BJAODN I linked to there? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The LTA page itself; I think the WoW page is redudnant now. --TheM62Manchester 23:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Glad to hear it! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:2006 Boston Massacre

I was also confused by those two edits on Talk:2006 Boston Massacre. My guess was an alternate user account? I left a message on both accounts' talk pages... —Wknight94 (talk) 03:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

lmao

You are the newest addition to my amusing quotes on my userpage (from ANI about Courtney). Cheers! Syrthiss 12:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Exxxxxcellent. Glad to see my juvenile humor didn't go unappreciated. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Cookie

I take orders well, once in a while. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)